In terms of me deserving full payment even if somebody doesn't like the signature (and another full fee if they want it done over):
If I pursuade the signer to follow the written directions, I deserve full payment.
If the directions just say the signature must match what is printed under the signature line, and the signature is illegible, it matches. If they want a legible signature that matches what's printed under the signature, they have to spell that requirement out.
If they demand cursive and reject printing, the signer should sue them for age discrimination (not taught recently or discrimination on the basis of national origin (not taught to those who learn English as a second language).
In terms of what the law is, I believe RULONA captures it well (although this has been the operational definition since the invention of the telegraph). In the Vermont version,
(14) “Sign” means, with present intent to authenticate or adopt a record:
(A) to execute or adopt a tangible symbol; or
(B) to attach to or logically associate with the record an electronic symbol, sound, or process.
(15) “Signature” means a tangible symbol or an electronic signature that evidences the signing of a record.
As for "legal signature", because the meanings above are so broad, nearly anything can be a legal signature if the person who executes the record intends it to be their signature.
As for the signature on the driver license, if the signature on the driver license looks like the signature on the document, it will make it somewhat easier to defend the authenticity of the signature. But that doesn't mean a signature that looks totally different isn't legal. It isn't the notary's job to tell the signer exactly how their signature should look; that's a signing agent function. (Of course, if the signature seems deceptive to the notary, such as a person who's driver license says "Peter Piper" signs a very neat cursive "Nancy Drew", the notary should probably decline to act and just leave.) |
